As
mentioned earlier, in mid-1990
two members of the Refugee
Board declared that Paszkowski
was not a refugee under
the United Nations Convention
on Refugees. They accepted
Paszkowski's sworn testimony
that he'd bought out his
Polish citizenship while
in the German jail, noting
that his payment to do so
was considered a debt owing
to the Polish government,
and found nothing from the
Immigration Minister's side
to suggest otherwise. "We
find on a balance of probability
that (Paszkowski) has lost
his Polish citizenship pursuant
to renunciation and, therefore,
lacks Polish nationality."

The
Board decision then went
on to find that West Germany
was Paszkowski's country
of "former habitual residence"
within the meaning of the
Immigration Act. They discussed
his permanent resident status
in West Germany granted
in August, 1983 and his
application for citizenship
there in the spring of 1989.
Although the second request
was not acted upon, they
noted that he did receive
a West German travel document
in late 1989.

A
discussion of Ela's difficulties
with the SB in Cologne then
followed. The Board then
seized on the testimony
given to it by Nick Maduck
and another CSIS employee
to the effect that Paszkowski
had in fact no involvement
whatsoever in Poland with
the Polish Intelligence
Service. The Board went
over what it heard about
threats and physical assault
to Ela in Cologne by the
SB agents, placing considerable
stress on its impression
that she had not reported
the kidnapping to police
in Cologne. It concluded
that Paszkowski had no well-founded
fear of persecution in West
Germany. Brushing over the
fact that he had already
been recognized as a Convention
Refugee in West Germany,
the Board declared: "...there
is no evidence before us
that the claimant would
have a reasonable chance
of being persecuted were
he returned to West Germany."

Later
in 1990, Karen Granoski,
manager of the Immigration
department in Edmonton,
wrote to the Consulate of
the Federal Republic of
Germany in the city asking
for an emergency travel
document for Ryszard Paszkowski
"in order that we may effect
his deportation from Canada"
and "that he be returned
to Frankfurt." She quoted
the Immigration Act as saying
that an excluded person
should be removed from Canada
to the country of last permanent
residence before arrival
in Canada. She wrote in
this vein despite the fact
that Kim Hutchinson, her
supervisor of enforcement,
had already received a copy
of a letter the same consulate
had earlier sent to Paszkowski
indicating he no longer
had the right to live in
Germany.

The
German Vice-Consul in Edmonton,
Holger Fraider, had informed
Hutchinson about three months
earlier that Paszkowski's
travel document could not
be extended by Germany because
he was no longer a lawful
resident of it. According
to the Germans, Ryszard
gave up his resident status
in West Germany when he
came to Canada in 1989 for
reasons that could hardly
be considered "temporary".
His German residence permit
had therefore expired. At
about the same time, External
Affairs had informed Immigration
headquarters in Ottawa that
the German government would
provide neither a passport
nor residence status for
Paszkowski as he had been
absent from Germany for
more than six months. The
German officials had added
that their decision was
not taken locally.

The
months passed into the summer
of 1991. Deeply frustrated
by its inability to deport
Paszkowski to Germany, Immigration
headquarters had approached
the External Affairs department
to lobby German diplomats
on the issue. This appears
to have gone nowhere.

By
the fall of 1991, the Alberta
regional Immigration office
had switched its hopes to
Poland. The acting manager
proposed to his head office
that it pursue removal to
Poland as the only remaining
course of action. Assessing
the political situation
in Poland would be necessary
to determine if there were
legitimate safety concerns
about returning Paszkowski
to Poland. Rymes, the acting
Manager, also wrote that
"we have to examine Section
53(1) of the Act that would
allow us to consider removal
to Poland in subject's case,
even if he were found to
be a Convention Refugee
under Canadian Law (which
he was not). The nature
of this individual will
ensure that his case remains
in the public view for as
long as he remains in Canada.
The more he remains in the
public view, the less patience
the Canadian public has
with our Department and
our inability to remove
him. This is compounded
by the fact that he has
two separate criminal charges
pending before the courts,
both of which raise concerns
about the public safety
and order. Taken in the
above context, I believe
removal to Poland should
be our next course of action
if legally feasible."

At
the end of October, Hallam
Johnston, wrote to Ingrid
Wilson, Director of Immigration
for the Alberta/NWT region
telling her that as no further
reply from the German authorities
had been received serious
consideration should be
given to the possibility
of deporting Paszkowski
to Poland. He added that
the political situation
in Poland had changed since
Paszkowski's dramatic escape
and requested assistance
from External Affairs to
approach the Polish authorities
to see if they might take
Paszkowski back and in providing
information on current Polish
security activities.

Brian
Coleman at the research
section of Immigration headquarters
was asked at about this
time by Gisele Gaudet, Chief
of Immigration's Europe
Branch, to get a reading
on the state of the Polish
security apparatus and to
check if despite the changes
in Poland the sinister aspects
of the Polish security agencies
continued. The background
for the research requested
was given and an indication
provided that it was to
explore the possibility
of deporting a Polish national,
already found to be a convention
refugee by the German authorities,
to Poland as his country
of birth.

Only
six days later, Coleman's
research was completed and
his report landed on Gaudet's
desk. The subject matter
was referred to as: "Poland:
Would a former member of
the Polish Intelligence
Service, who worked while
in Canada for CSIS, be able
to return safely to Poland.
Poland today is a state
of law," and its government,
concerned with image, would
not have the new Intelligence
Service do something against
the law. Although the Polish
Intelligence Service would
obviously be interested
in hearing how CSIS operates,
he went on, "they would
not force a citizen to tell
what he knows or punish
him for not telling. Although
the Polish people have no
liking for former members
of the security services,"
Coleman concluded, "his
former employment would
not likely interfere with
his obtaining ordinary employment.
He should have no grounds
for concern in returning
to Poland."

According
to a Polish source, however,
criminal offenses during
1990 alone rose by 65%.
Break-ins and thefts were
at an all-time record. Gangs
and international crime
rings were operating freely.
It was widely-known that
many on the police force
had connections with organized
crime. A number of former
SB agents, moreover, were
also employed in the police
forces. Acts of terrorism
with explosives and firearms
were also occurring, which
was almost unheard of in
communist Poland. The SB,
moreover, remained a powerful
player. Across Poland, there
were still more than 24,000
SB employees. This number
was further increased by
tens of thousands of informants
and agents. A number of
Poles familiar with the
country today have since
told me that there is still
a real danger to Paszkowski
should he return to Poland
and it would come from former
SB colleagues seeking to
settle the score with him
privately.

Finally,
in April 1992, Paszkowski
was asked by the most senior
Edmonton Immigration employees
to complete what they told
him was an application for
a Polish travel document.
In fact the document in
Polish was an application
for a Polish passport. He
refused, of course, to do
so when he read the form.

The
briefing note and media
lines on Paszkowski's file
prepared a month later for
Immigration officials said
that his removal was being
pursued. "If subject does
not cooperate with our request
to complete the travel document
application, we are recommending
the use of a Single Journey
Form. We expect the cooperation
of the Polish authorities."
On August 7, however, Edmonton
Immigration was advised
that the Polish authorities
had refused to issue a travel
document for Paszkowski
because his signature was
not on the application.
The original applications
were returned and kept on
file in the event that Paszkowski
was ever apprehended and
persuaded to sign them.

Paszkowski's
most recent detention period
began on September 21, 1992
with Edmonton Immigration
officials hoping that his
removal from the country
would be completed soon.
"We find on a balance of
probabilities that the claimant
has lost his Polish citizenship
pursuant to renunciation
and, therefore, lacks Polish
nationality," says the summation
of Paszkowski's refugee
claim by the Refugee Board
in June 1990, something
the senior Edmonton Immigration
officials decided to ignore
in their efforts to deport
him.

Three
days later, they sent a
letter to the Embassy of
Poland in Ottawa requesting
visas for three escort officers
to accompany Ryszard Paszkowski
pursuant to his deportation
order. Enclosed was a complete
visa application for each
of the escorts, each officers'
passport, photographs, and
three money orders for $150
each. A self-addressed envelope,
prepared for return by Priority
Post was also enclosed.
The letter asked for processing
of the request as quickly
as possible as "Mr. Paszkowski
is currently detained for
removal."

The
itinerary to Warsaw read:
"Departure September 27
CP flight via Paris to Warsaw.
Return flights are in business
class for three escorts
and one through London,
England. The times and flights
are all complete. CIC is
ready to proceed with deportation."

A
fax dated September 25,
1992 reached Immigration
headquarters in Ottawa from
Warsaw (presumably the Canadian
embassy there) referring
to the removal of Paszkowski:
"...have been advised by
frontier border guards that
after completion of background
checks and in consultation
with Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Paszkowski will
be refused entry to Poland.
Polish authorities of opinion
subject no longer Polish
citizen and may have claim
to German citizenship. Poles
will not accept."

Robert
Ferguson in Edmonton told
his enforcement supervisor
the same day, that headquarters
"is telling us to `hold
off' on removal temporarily.
This was while we thought
we might be able to move
within a few days. Basically,
we want to continue making
`tentative' arrangements
as we are for Oct. 6. But
we do not have concurrence
to remove at this time."

A
new travel itinerary was
prepared for the 6th of
October for Paszkowski and
three escorts. At about
this time, the enforcement
supervisor in Edmonton,
Kim Hutchinson, requested
the assistance of two Mounties
to take Paszkowski to Warsaw.
"Mr. Paszkowski is a danger
to the public and an escape
risk," his letter said.
"He has been convicted of
hijacking a passenger airplane
and has escaped from jail."
The travel itinerary was
included. Travel expenses,
including overtime, would
be paid by the Immigration
department. This proposal
collapsed when the Polish
Embassy refused to issue
visas to escort officers
on the premise that Paszkowski
had refused to sign for
a travel document. Meanwhile,
Paszkowski's incarceration
continued.

On
September 30, a phone conference
on the Paszkowski file took
place among various Immigration
officials. The difficulty
with Polish authorities
in obtaining a passport
for Paszkowski was discussed.
It was suggested that a
headquarters employee visit
the Polish Embassy to enquire,
send a diplomatic note,
or even call in the Polish
ambassador to have him answer
why they weren't cooperating.
A headquarters officer said
his Edmonton colleagues
should argue for continued
detention based on the fact
they were pursuing removal
and Paszkowski might disappear
if released. The bureaucratic
view in Ottawa was clearly
that they didn't want any
public perception to develop
they were being too easy
on Paszkowski. To release
him from detention on a
substantial cash bond would
not, however, be considered
disastrous.

On
October 1, Sylvia Rapaj,
an Immigration employee
in Edmonton, was informed
by her Ottawa headquarters
that they were pursuing
the option of clarifying
Paszkowski's citizenship
through diplomatic channels.
Rapaj was told to oppose
Paszkowski's release on
bail on the basis that hectic
diplomatic activity was
under way.

A
draft of a diplomatic note
to the Polish Embassy on
Paszkowski was sent to External
Affairs by Immigration headquarters
with a request to submit
it in final form to the
embassy. The note sought
confirmation that Paszkowski
formally renounced his Polish
citizenship: "...Mr. Paszkowski
has not been able to provide
a document proving that
he renounced his Polish
citizenship, and in the
absence of such evidence
the Minister of Employment
and Immigration is required
by law to remove him to
the Republic of Poland."
Headquarters was also attempting
to clarify Polish law on
the renunciation of his
citizenship with Bonn. By
November, even the option
of sending Paszkowski to
the Netherlands as the country
of last and initial entry,
was also being explored
and legal advice sought.

Later,
a note went to Immigration
headquarters case management
from Rob Ferguson in Edmonton
about a hearing scheduled
for November 12th. It said
that Bruce Logan, the Department
of Justice lawyer, "expects
counsel to argue strongly
for subject's release at
the next detention review."
In discussions with prosecutors
regarding people released
on bail, Logan advised mid-level
drug traffickers are being
released on $50,000 security.
He considers Paszkowski
in the same category. In
addition Ferguson suggested
they ask Paszkowski (if
released) "to represent
himself for detention on
the 12th. Then we would
have him if the court decides
against him. Logan does
not think Brad Willis would
object to these conditions.
The above is a judgement
call. If we think we can
keep him in custody let's
do so. Please give this
some thought and consult
the RHQ (Regional headquarters),"
concluded Ferguson.